DOCSLIB.ORG

Facts and Q&A About the 90-Day Finding On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Facts and Q&A About the 90-Day Finding On California Golden Trout Protection Not Warranted Questions and Answers Prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, August 2011 Photo Credit: Kevin Aceituno, USFWS Q: What is a California golden trout? A: California golden trout is a subspecies of rainbow trout. Formerly known as Volcano Creek golden trout, they are well known for their bright coloration, red to red-orange belly and cheeks, bright gold lower sides, a central lateral band that is red-orange, and a deep olive-green back. California golden trout can reach lengths of 7 to 8 inches. California golden trout have been known to live as long as nine years, and they commonly reach six to seven years old. This is extremely old for stream-dwelling trout, and is likely due to the short growing season, high densities of fish, and a low abundance of food in these streams. These conditions create competition for scarce resources, promoting slow growth rates that lead to old ages of trout. Q: Where do they live? A: California golden trout inhabit the South Fork Kern River and Golden Trout Creek on the Kern Plateau in Tulare County, California. Both were once part of the same stream system, but became separated by volcanic activity in the region thousands of years ago. In Golden Trout Creek, the subspecies historically occurred from the headwaters, with the exception of headwater lakes, and the probable exception of upper reaches of some tributary streams, to a series of waterfalls where the creek joined with the Kern River. In the South Fork Kern River they historically occurred from the headwaters to the Domeland Wilderness. Q: What do they need to thrive? A: California golden trout require flowing water, adequate stream substrate, and a specific range of water temperatures to successfully reproduce (spawn). They are uniquely adapted to their harsh environment - females begin egg development for the following season while simultaneously going through egg maturation for the present season. This allows females to prepare for spawning in the following year in the event that conditions are not favorable for egg maturation at that time. California golden trout reach sexual maturity when they are 3 to 4 years old. Q: Why were they considered for listing? A: Designated the official state fish in 1947, California golden trout have experienced population pressures for more than a century. They have been subjected to habitat degradation from grazing on numerous occasions since the 1800s; hybridization threats from introduced rainbow trout for at least 75 years, and predation and competition from brown trout since the 1940s. In 2000, Trout Unlimited petitioned the Service to list the subspecies based on those threats. Q. What did the petition cite as reasons that the trout should be listed? A. The petition alleged five threats to the California golden trout as justification for listing the subspecies. 1. It is threatened with hybridization and introgression with non-native rainbow trout. 2. Habitat loss and degradation due to livestock grazing, packstock, recreation, and poor land management by U.S. Forest Service threatens California golden trout. 3. Introduction of non-native brown trout has led to competition for scarce resources and to predation of California golden trout. 4. Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. 5. Whirling disease that could potentially be spread to the California golden trout if diseased hatchery trout fingerlings were to be stocked into headwaters lakes or into streams. Q. The California Golden trout is a subspecies. How does the Act address subspecies protections? A. Under the Act, the species definition also includes subspecies and distinct population segments and they are accorded the same protections under the Act. Q: What is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s determination regarding the status of the California golden trout? A: After a thorough review of all available scientific and commercial information, the Service has determined that the California golden trout does not warrant listing under the Act. This determination is based primarily on a reduction in threats resulting from conservation actions conducted in accordance with a multi-agency conservation strategy for the California golden trout. 2 Q. Why did the Service make this decision? A: Since the 90-Day Finding was published, numerous measures have been taken to address the potential threats that were identified in the petition. In 1999, the Service, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and U.S. Forest Service coordinated on an initial conservation strategy for the trout. In 2004, the Service signed a memorandum of agreement with CDFG and the Forest Service for implementation of the 2004 updated conservation assessment and strategy for California golden trout. Since 2004, the agencies have coordinated to improve conditions for the California golden trout and its habitat, thereby reducing the threats to the subspecies. Through State and Federal agency work with local stakeholders (such as Orvis, Trout Unlimited, CalTrout, and Federation of Fly Fishers), numerous habitat restoration efforts have been completed and continue to be implemented in accordance with the Conservation Strategy. Following are examples of conservation actions that have been initiated: (1) The Forest Service has “rested” grazing on two of the seven allotments to alleviate grazing pressures and promote restoration; (2) Fish barriers on the South Fork Kern River have been significantly improved, addressing predation and competition by brown trout and introgression issues by preventing movement of nonnative and hybrid trout; (3) introgressed trout have been removed from the headwater lakes of Golden Trout Creek, thus eliminating the source of introgression in the creek system; and (4) stocking of reproductively viable nonnative trout was curtailed within the California golden trout’s range in 2004. Efforts are ongoing to remove and monitor brown trout populations in the South Fork Kern River. The University of California, Davis is currently completing a genetic management strategy, which is due to the Service by December 31, 2011. Q. What happens now? A. At this point, the Service will take no further action with regard to listing the California golden trout. However, with our partners the US Forest Service, CDFG, and others, we will continue carrying out the activities needed to restore the subspecies in accordance with the 2004 Conservation Strategy. The Service will accept additional information and comments from all concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party concerning the status of this subspecies. More questions? Write or call: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Endangered Species Division 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 414-6600 3 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • California Golden Trout Chances for Survival: Poor 2 Oncorhynchus Mykiss Aguabonita
    California Golden Trout chances for survival: poor 2 Oncorhynchus mykiss aguabonita alifornia golden trout, the official state fish, is one of three species disTriBuTion: California golden trout are endemic to imple mented. major efforts have been made to create refugia 1 2 3 4 5 TROUT south Fork Kern river and to Golden trout Creek. they for golden trout in the upper reaches of the south Fork Kern of brilliantly colored trout native to the upper Kern river basin; the have been introduced into many other lakes and creeks in river by constructing barriers and then applying the poison others are the little Kern golden trout and Kern river rainbow trout. and outside of California, including the Cottonwood lakes rotenone to kill all unwanted fish above barriers. Despite California Golden Trout Were not far from the headwaters of Golden trout Creek and into these and other efforts, most populations of California golden Historically Present in South Fork Kern C Basin, Part Of The Upper Kern River California golden trout evolved in streams of the southern sierra Nevada the headwaters of south Fork Kern river, such as mulkey trout are hybridized and are under continual threat from Basin Shown Here Creek. the Cottonwood lakes have been a source of golden brown trout invasions. management actions are needed to mountains, at elevations above 7,500 feet. the Kern plateau is broad and flat, trout eggs for stocking other waters and are still used for address threats to California golden trout which include with wide meadows and meandering streams. the streams are small, shallow, stocking lakes in Fresno and tulare Counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Sport-Fish-Identification.Pdf
    Walleye Walleye have two distinct fins on their back, the first with large spines. Lake Sturgeon They have a yellow-olive back, brassy, silvery sides with yellow spots, a white underside, and white on the lower lobe of the tail. Dusky vertical Lake Sturgeon are a Threatened Species due to population size and bars are often found on the body as well. concerns with viability. Lake Sturgeon have a large brown or grey body covered with tough, leather- like tissue and five rows of bony plates. They have a shark-like, upturned tail and a pointed snout with four barbels. Sauger Lake Whitefish are olive-green to blue on the back, with silvery sides.They Sauger are a Threatened Species due to hybridization, habitat Lakehave a small Whitefish mouth below a rounded snout, and a deeply forked tail. degradation and overharvest. Sauger are golden olive on the back with silver-yellow sides and a white underside. They also have a large spiny dorsal fin, distinct rows of spots on the dorsal fins and three or four dusky vertical bars on the body. Mountain Whitefish have large scales, no spots and small mouths with no Burbot Mountainteeth. Their general Whitefish body colour is a bronze-white or greenish white. Burbot have a slim, brownish black body with smooth skin, a flattened head, and a fin that stretches along the back half of the body. Distinctive barbels hang from the lower jaw and nostrils. Goldeye Northern Pike Goldeye have prominent eyes with bright yellow pupils, a blunt head, and Northern Pike are a long, slender fish with duck-like jaws and a long, flat a deep, compressed body.
    [Show full text]
  • Jordan Toll Trail by William F
    Jordan Toll Trail By William F. (Bill) Jordan In the year of 1860, there was a lot of verbal and political activity about the matter of building roads across the Sierra Mountains. In April, 1860, the Tulare County Supervisors appointed a committee to view a road and pack trail from Visalia to Mono. On January 30, 1860, the Visalia Delta announced that a company had been formed and application was made to the legislature to build a toll road from Visalia to Owens Lake. S. G. George, H. L. Mathews. S. Sweet, Henry Bostwick, John Jordan, and W. F. Jordan. About or before that time, the large Coso Silver and Gold Mines opened up. They were located southeast of Owens Lake up in the Coso Range of mountains, east of Owens Valley. The mines are what attracted all of this excitement. While all this talk and legislative action was going on, John Jordan and his son, William F. Jordan, were apparently going ahead with a toll trail project under the authority given by the Tulare County Board of Supervisors. The Jordan petition is on file at the Tulare County Courthouse and reads as follows: Saturday, March 30, 1861. whereas, the Board of Supervisors of Tulare County have this day passed a resolution instructing our Senator and Representative in the Legislature of the State of California, authorizing said County of Tulare to levy an additional road tax of 10 cents on each $100.00 worth of taxable property in said County. Now, therefore, if the Legislature shall pass the Act aforesaid, it is, by this Board ordered that all the taxes arising from the aforesaid special Act for one year, shall be applied to building and constructing a certain wagon road leading from San Luis Obispo County to Coso by the way of Visalia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Native Trout Waters of California Details Six of the State’S Most Scenic, Diverse, and Significant Native Trout Fisheries
    NATIVE TROUT WATERS OF CALIFORNIA Michael Carl The Ecological Angler www.ecoangler.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUTION – THE ORIGINAL SIX 4 ABOUT THE BOOK 4 CLAVEY RIVER 5 BACKGROUND 6 TROUT POPULATION DATA 6 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 7 DIRECTIONS TO REACH SEGMENT 3 AND 4 (E.G., BRIDGE CROSSING CLAVEY RIVER): 7 AREA MAP 8 CLAVEY RIVER FLOW STATISTICS 9 FISHING TECHNIQUES 9 EAGLE LAKE 10 BACKGROUND 11 BIG TROUT FOOD – TUI CHUBS 11 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 11 DIRECTIONS TO EAGLE LAKE FROM RED BLUFF, CALIFORNIA: 11 AREA MAP 12 PRODUCTIVE TIMES AND ZONES TO FISH 13 FISHING TECHNIQUES 13 SPALDING TRACT – TOPO MAP 14 PIKES POINT – TOPO MAP 15 GOLDEN TROUT CREEK 16 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 17 ABUNDANCE OF CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT 17 CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT GENETIC DATA 17 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 18 DIRECTIONS TO COTTONWOOD PASS TRAILHEAD 18 AREA MAP 19 PHOTO JOURNAL – COTTONWOOD PASS TO TUNNEL MEADOW 20 FISHING TECHNIQUES 23 HEENAN LAKE 24 BACKGROUND 25 FLY ANGLER STATISTICS – 2007 SEASON (8/3/07 TO 10/28/07) 26 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 27 AREA MAP 27 DIRECTIONS 27 PRODUCTIVE ZONES TO FISH 28 FISHING TECHNIQUES 28 UPPER KERN RIVER 29 BACKGROUND 30 KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 DISTRIBUTION OF KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 31 MAP – LLOYD MEADOW ROAD TO FORKS OF THE KERN 32 SPOTLIGHT – FORKS OF THE KERN 33 DIRECTIONS AND TRAIL DESCRIPTION 33 RECOMMENDED FISHING GEAR 33 UPPER TRUCKEE RIVER 35 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 36 ABUNDANCE AND SIZE OF LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT 37 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, ACCESS & DISTANCE 37 DIRECTIONS TO REACH TRAILHEAD: 38 AREA MAP 39 TRAIL DESCRIPTION 40 FISHING TECHNIQUES 40 Introduction – The Original Six The Native Trout Waters of California details six of the state’s most scenic, diverse, and significant native trout fisheries.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration of the California Golden Trout in the South Fork Kern River, Kern Plateau, Tulare County, California, 1966-2004, with Reference to Golden Trout Creek
    State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME RESTORATION OF THE CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT IN THE SOUTH FORK KERN RIVER, KERN PLATEAU, TULARE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 1966-2004, WITH REFERENCE TO GOLDEN TROUT CREEK By E. P. (Phil) Pister, Inland Deserts Region, Retired CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT Central Region Administrative Report No. 2008-1 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 2 The Beginning..................................................................................................... 2 EARLY WARNINGS ....................................................................................................... 5 THE PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 6 WATERSHED RESTORATION ...................................................................................... 8 THE FIRST FISH BARRIER AND EARLY BROWN TROUT CONTROL....................... 8 1976 – THE MAJOR PROJECT BEGINS..................................................................... 10 TEMPLETON AND SCHAEFFER BARRIERS............................................................. 12 1977 -1979 – HOLDING THE LINE .............................................................................. 16 1980 -1983 – MAJOR CHEMICAL TREATMENTS AND BEGINNING
    [Show full text]
  • Page 78 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 45A–1 Kaweah River and The
    § 45a–1 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 78 Kaweah River and the headwaters of that branch Fork Kaweah River to its junction with Cactus of Little Kern River known as Pecks Canyon; Creek; thence easterly along the first hydro- thence southerly and easterly along the crest of graphic divide south of Cactus Creek to its the hydrographic divide between Pecks Canyon intersection with the present west boundary of and Soda Creek to its intersection with a lateral Sequoia National Park, being the west line of divide at approximately the east line of section township 16 south, range 29 east; thence south- 2, township 19 south, range 31 east; thence erly along said west boundary to the southwest northeasterly along said lateral divide to its corner of said township; thence easterly along intersection with the township line near the the present boundary of Sequoia National Park, southeast corner of township 18 south, range 31 being the north line of township 17 south, range east of the Mount Diablo base and meridian; 29 east, to the northeast corner of said township; thence north approximately thirty-five degrees thence southerly along the present boundary of west to the summit of the butte next north of Sequoia National Park, being the west lines of Soda Creek (United States Geological Survey al- townships 17 and 18 south, range 30 east, to the titude eight thousand eight hundred and eighty- place of beginning; and all of those lands lying eight feet); thence northerly and northwesterly within the boundary line above described are in- along the crest of the hydrographic divide to a cluded in and made a part of the Roosevelt-Se- junction with the crest of the main hydro- quoia National Park; and all of those lands ex- graphic divide between the headwaters of the cluded from the present Sequoia National Park South Fork of the Kaweah River and the head- are included in and made a part of the Sequoia waters of Little Kern River; thence northerly National Forest, subject to all laws and regula- along said divide now between Horse and Cow tions applicable to the national forests.
    [Show full text]
  • The Native Trouts of the Genus Salmo of Western North America
    CItiEt'SW XHPYTD: RSOTLAITYWUAS 4 Monograph of ha, TEMPI, AZ The Native Trouts of the Genus Salmo Of Western North America Robert J. Behnke "9! August 1979 z 141, ' 4,W \ " • ,1■\t 1,es. • . • • This_report was funded by USDA, Forest Service Fish and Wildlife Service , Bureau of Land Management FORE WARD This monograph was prepared by Dr. Robert J. Behnke under contract funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Forest Service. Region 2 of the Forest Service was assigned the lead in coordinating this effort for the Forest Service. Each agency assumed the responsibility for reproducing and distributing the monograph according to their needs. Appreciation is extended to the Bureau of Land Management, Denver Service Center, for assistance in publication. Mr. Richard Moore, Region 2, served as Forest Service Coordinator. Inquiries about this publication should be directed to the Regional Forester, 11177 West 8th Avenue, P.O. Box 25127, Lakewood, Colorado 80225. Rocky Mountain Region September, 1980 Inquiries about this publication should be directed to the Regional Forester, 11177 West 8th Avenue, P.O. Box 25127, Lakewood, Colorado 80225. it TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preface ..................................................................................................................................................................... Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ''''''''State of California-The Resources Agency
    ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD 1807 13TH STREET, SUITE 103 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 (916) 445-8448 FAX (916) 323-0280 The Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD Minutes February 23, 2001 ITEM NO. PAGE 1. Roll Call ...............................................................................................................................1 2. Funding Status–Informational ....................................................................................................2 3. Special Project Planning Account–Informational ................................................................4 4. PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 5 - 18) ........................................................5 *5. Approval of Minutes – November 2, 2000 Meeting ............................................................5 *6. Recovery of Funds ...............................................................................................................5 *7. Wetland Habitat Restoration, Eel River Wildlife Area, Humboldt County *8. Wetland Habitat Restoration, Upper Butte Basin Wildlife Area, Little Dry Creek Unit, Butte County *9. Lake Redding Fishing Access Amendment, Shasta County *10. Wetland Habitat Restoration, East Grasslands (Castle Land and Cattle) Phase 3, Merced County *11. Fields Landing Public Access Amendment, Humboldt County *12. Belden’s Landing Public Access, Phase III, Solano County *13. Wildwood Native Park Public
    [Show full text]
  • SWFSC Archive
    Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and its Alteration by Dams STEVEN T. LINDLEY1, ROBERT S. SCHICK1, ADITYA AGRAWAL2, MATTHEW GOSLIN2, THOMAS E. PEARSON2, ETHAN MORA2, JAMES J. ANDERSON3, BERNARD MAY4, SHEILA GREENE5, CHARLES HANSON6, ALICE LOW7, DENNIS MCEWAN7, R. BRUCE MACFARLANE1, CHRISTINA SWANSON8 AND JOHN G. WILLIAMS9 ABSTRACT Effective conservation and recovery planning for Central Valley steelhead requires an understanding of historical population structure. We describe the historical structure of the Central Valley steelhead evolutionarily significant unit using a multi-phase modeling approach. In the first phase, we identify stream reaches possibly suitable for steelhead spawning and rearing using a habitat model based on environmental envelopes (stream discharge, gradient, and temperature) that takes a digital elevation model and climate data as inputs. We identified 151 patches of potentially suitable habitat with more than 10 km of stream habitat, with a total of 25,500 km of suitable habitat. We then measured the dis- tances among habitat patches, and clustered together patches within 35 km of each other into 81 dis- tinct habitat patches. Groups of fish using these 81 patches are hypothesized to be (or to have been) independent populations for recovery planning purposes. Consideration of climate and elevation differ- ences among the 81 habitat areas suggests that there are at least four major subdivisions within the Central Valley steelhead ESU that correspond to geographic regions defined by the Sacramento River basin, Suisun Bay area tributaries, San Joaquin tributaries draining the Sierra Nevada, and lower-ele- vation streams draining to the Buena Vista and Tulare basins, upstream of the San Joaquin River.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Inventory and Evaluation Planning
    U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Wilderness May 2015 Update Wilderness Inventory and Evaluation Background: The Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests are revising their land and resource management plans using the 2012 Planning Rule. This rule requires the agency to identify and evaluate lands that may be suitable for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS). In 1964, Congress created the NWPS to protect some of the most natural and undisturbed places in America. Only Congress can designate wilderness; however, federal land managers, citizens or other groups can make wilderness recommendations to Congress. In August 2014, the Forest Service shared a preliminary wilderness inventory with the public and tribes to gather feedback on the lands that had been inventoried to determine those areas that should or should not be further considered for wilderness recommendation. Forest Service Current Work: The inventory and evaluation (steps 1 and 2 of the 4-step wilderness inventory process) on the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests have been completed. The results will be included as an appendix in the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) being prepared for these forest plan revisions. Not all lands included in the inventory and subsequent evaluations are required to be carried forward. In total, the Forest Service is considering 10 areas for analysis as recommended wilderness. Of these areas, 3 are potential new recommended wilderness areas, and 7 are potential recommended additions to current
    [Show full text]
  • Kern Storm Water Resource Plan
    Kern Storm Water Resource Plan Kern County, California DRAFT – October 2016 Prepared by: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group 1800 30th Street, Suite 280, Bakersfield, California 93301 COPYRIGHT 2016 by PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group expressly reserves its common law copyright and other applicable property rights to this document. This document is not to be reproduced, changed, or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to a third party without first obtaining the written permission and consent of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group In the event of unauthorized reuse of the information contained herein by a third party, the third party shall hold the firm of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group harmless, and shall bear the cost of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group's legal fees associated with defending and enforcing these rights. Report Prepared by: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Jeff Eklund, PE Len Marino, PE Mike Day, PE Gretchen Heisdorf, PE Hilary Reinhard, PE Trilby Barton Cheryl Hunter Contact: Jeff Eklund, PE, Principal Engineer/Vice President Telephone: (661) 616-5900 G:\Buena Vista WSD-1048\104816001-Kern Storm Water Resource Plan\_DOCS\Reports\1012-2016 Kern SWRP Consolidated Draft.docx Kern Storm Water Resource Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Lakes Guide: Absaroka, Beartooth & Crazies
    2021 MOUNTAIN LAKES GUIDE Silver Lake ABSAROKA - BEARTOOTH & CRAZY MOUNTAINS Fellow Angler: This booklet is intended to pass on information collected over many years about the fishery of the Absaroka-Beartooth high country lakes. Since Pat Marcuson began surveying these lakes in 1967, many individuals have hefted a heavy pack and worked the high country for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. They have brought back the raw data and personal observations necessary to formulate management schemes for the 300+ lakes in this area containing fish. While the information presented here is not intended as a guide for hiking/camping or fishing techniques, it should help wilderness users to better plan their trips according to individual preferences and abilities. Fish species present in the Absaroka-Beartooth lakes include Yellowstone cutthroat trout, brook trout, rainbow trout, golden trout, arctic grayling, and variations of cutthroat/rainbow/golden trout hybrids. These lake fisheries generally fall into two categories: self-sustaining and stocked. Self-sustaining lakes have enough spawning habitat to allow fish to restock themselves year after year. These often contain so many fish that while fishing can be fast, the average fish size will be small. The average size and number of fish present change very little from year to year in most of these lakes. Lakes without spawning potential must be planted regularly to sustain a fishery. Standard stocking in the Beartooths is 50-100 Yellowstone cutthroat trout fingerlings per acre every eight years. Special situations may call for different species, numbers, or frequency of plants. For instance, lakes with heavy fishing pressure tend to be stocked more often and at higher densities.
    [Show full text]